IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2109.01852.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Infinite utility: counterparts and ultimate locations

Author

Listed:
  • Adam Jonsson

Abstract

The locations problem in infinite ethics concerns the relative moral status of different categories of potential bearers of value, the primary examples of which are people and points in time. The challenge is to determine which category of value bearers are of ultimate moral significance: the ultimate locations, for short. This paper defends the view that the ultimate locations are 'people at times'. A person at a time is not a specific person, but the person born at a specific point in time (de dicto). The main conclusion of the paper is that the unsettling implications of the time- and person-centered approaches to infinite ethics can be avoided. Most notably, a broad class of worlds that person-centered views deem incomparable can be strictly ranked.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam Jonsson, 2021. "Infinite utility: counterparts and ultimate locations," Papers 2109.01852, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2109.01852
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.01852
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arrhenius, Gustaf, 2000. "An Impossibility Theorem for Welfarist Axiologies," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 247-266, October.
    2. Fleurbaey, Marc & Michel, Philippe, 2003. "Intertemporal equity and the extension of the Ramsey criterion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 777-802, September.
    3. Hamkins, Joel David & Montero, Barbara, 2000. "Utilitarianism in Infinite Worlds," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 91-96, March.
    4. Lauwers, Luc & Vallentyne, Peter, 2004. "Infinite Utilitarianism: More Is Always Better," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 307-330, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Asheim, Geir B. & d'Aspremont, Claude & Banerjee, Kuntal, 2010. "Generalized time-invariant overtaking," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 519-533, July.
    2. Asheim, Geir B. & Kamaga, Kohei & Zuber, Stéphane, 2022. "Maximal sensitivity under Strong Anonymity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    3. Christian Tarsney & Teruji Thomas, 2020. "Non-Additive Axiologies in Large Worlds," Papers 2010.06842, arXiv.org.
    4. Pivato, Marcus, 2022. "A characterization of Cesàro average utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    5. Marcus Pivato, 2014. "Additive representation of separable preferences over infinite products," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 31-83, June.
    6. Mohamed Ben Ridha Mabrouk, 2011. "Translation invariance when utility streams are infinite and unbounded," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 7(4), pages 317-329, December.
    7. Kohei Kamaga, 2016. "Infinite-horizon social evaluation with variable population size," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(1), pages 207-232, June.
    8. Lauwers, Luc, 2010. "Ordering infinite utility streams comes at the cost of a non-Ramsey set," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 32-37, January.
    9. Charles Figuières & Mabel Tidball, 2016. "Sustainable Exploitation of a Natural Resource: A Satisfying Use of Chichilnisky’s Criterion," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 207-229, Springer.
    10. Adachi, Tsuyoshi & Cato, Susumu & Kamaga, Kohei, 2014. "Extended anonymity and Paretian relations on infinite utility streams," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 24-32.
    11. Charles Blackorby & Walter Bossert & David Donaldson, 2003. "The Axiomatic Approach to Population Ethics," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 2(3), pages 342-381, October.
    12. BLACKORBY, Charles & BOSSERT, Walter & DONALDSON, David, 2006. "Population Ethics," Cahiers de recherche 2006-15, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
      • BLACKORBY, Charles & BOSSERT, Walter & DONALDSON, David, 2006. "Population Ethics," Cahiers de recherche 14-2006, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    13. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2003:i:26:p:1-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Asheim, Geir B. & Zuber, Stéphane, 2016. "Evaluating intergenerational risks," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 104-117.
    15. Cato, Susumu & Harada, Ko, 2023. "A new result on the impossibility of avoiding both the repugnant and sadistic conclusions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    16. Basu, Kaushik & Mitra, Tapan, 2005. "On the Existence of Paretian Social Welfare Relations for Infinite Utility Streams with Extended Anonymity," Working Papers 05-06, Cornell University, Center for Analytic Economics.
    17. Luc Lauwers, 2016. "Intergenerational Equity, Efficiency, and Constructibility," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 191-206, Springer.
    18. de la Croix, David & Doepke, Matthias, 2021. "A soul’s view of the optimal population problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 98-108.
    19. Brown, Campbell, 2023. "Better than nothing: on defining the valence of a life," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120063, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Andreas T. Schmidt & Daan Juijn, 2024. "Economic inequality and the long-term future," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 23(1), pages 67-99, February.
    21. Geir B. Asheim & Stéphane Zuber, 2017. "Rank-discounting as a resolution to a dilemma in population ethics," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 17041, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2109.01852. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.